I have recently had dealings with a case where an employee (person A) was allegedly caused offence by a remark during a light hearted email exchange and I have tended to fall in favour of the supposed ‘offender’ (person B).
‘A’ emailed ‘B’ and remarked that she had popped in to see ‘B’ but had missed them as they had gone home early. This email had other persons cc’d. The suggestion of going home early was absolute presumption.
[note: face to face not possible due to shifts]
‘B’ was unimpressed at the promulgated suggestion that they had sloped off but wanted to address it without making an issue and so sent:
“Oi – I’ll have you know I had gone to a meeting and in fact worked an 11 hour day young lady”
‘A’ responded to ‘B’ that she was offended by the ‘young lady’ remark and consequently I became involved.
I have to say, I am struggling to support ‘A’ on either ageist or rudeness. I am more inclined to advise that on occasions, people need to lighten up and be less oversensitive as both parties involved are good in their roles and are not problem persons. There really must be a line where offensive behaviour actually becomes ‘oversensitive recipient’?
I’d be interested in your thoughts as those of my own peer group I have consulted have retorted with such as, “Whaaat?” and the such!
Perhaps I am just a dinosaur?
David Atkinson